Transcript Highlights:

• We're the sponsor of the measure.
• Our sponsor letter also includes some screenshots.
• We've had conversations with the sponsor. We've asked for examples.
• With respect, I think my sponsor and my friend Mr.
• And I think my sponsor can speak to the fact that he had...

Summary: The Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee heard several bills on AI, social media, rental cars, and account deletion. AB 316 by Assemblymember Krell would bar defendants from avoiding liability by claiming an AI system autonomously caused harm. Supporters argued it would preserve accountability as AI grows more powerful, especially in cases involving children, while opponents said existing tort law already covers these issues and warned the bill could create uncertainty and overbroad liability. The bill passed the committee 8-1. AB 656 by Assemblymember Schiavo, sponsored by Consumer Federation of California, would make it easier for users to delete social media accounts and personal information, with amendments shifting the deletion prompt into settings rather than on every screen. Supporters said platforms use dark patterns and make deletion unnecessarily difficult; opponents raised concerns about unintended deletions and possible conflicts with existing privacy law, though the author said the bill was being aligned with CCPA. The bill passed 9-0. The committee also approved the consent calendar. AB 1197 by Assemblymember Calderon would address rental car theft and misuse by allowing limited geofencing in specific situations and revising rules around renter liability when keys are returned and a police report is filed. Rental car companies and other supporters said the bill would help recover stolen or abandoned vehicles, while an opponent warned about privacy and possible consumer harms in edge cases. The bill passed 11-0. AB 1374 by Assemblymember Berman would require more upfront disclosure of the total price of rental cars, including mandatory fees, to curb hidden charges; supporters said consumers still face surprise costs, while opponents argued current law already requires disclosure and that the bill’s new wording could invite litigation. It passed 13-0.

Transcript Highlights:

• First item on the agenda is Senate Bill 126, sponsored by Senator McDaniel. to the committee Senator
• item on the agenda is Senate<00:01:23.720> Bill<00:01:24.000> 126<00:01:24.799> sponsored
• <00:12:25.480> by<00:12:25.639> Senator Senate Bill 37 sponsored by Senator Senate
• Bill 37 sponsored by Senator Elkins Mr.
• this bill because willing to co-sponsor this bill because I<00:19:22.240> really<00:19:22.440

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:00 Attendance Roll Call: 00:00 Senate Bill 126 (Sen. McDaniel): 01:21 Senate Bill 37 (Sen. Elkins): 12:23 Adjournment: 21:06, 958, all

Summary: The committee met with a quorum and took up two bills. Senate Bill 126, sponsored by Senator McDaniel, proposed a constitutional amendment to limit the governor’s pardon power during the final 60 days before a gubernatorial election and through the transition period, with the stated goal of giving voters more time to learn about executive clemency decisions. McDaniel said the measure was intended to increase accountability and noted it would need approval by both chambers and then placement on the 2026 ballot. Senator Haron raised concerns about whether the proposal could chill pardons and asked about the timing; McDaniel responded that 60 days was chosen because of early voting and the need for public notice. The committee adopted a substitute and then passed the bill with a favorable expression; several members voted aye, Senator Haron passed, and Senator Adams later asked to be recorded as voting aye before adjournment. The committee then considered Senate Bill 37, sponsored by Senator Elkins, which would amend Kentucky law on indigent burials to allow cremation as an option instead of requiring burial, and would require consultation with the county coroner before a decision is made. Elkins described it as a local control measure and said he was working with Rabbi Litman on a possible accommodation for Jewish indigent decedents, since the Jewish community strongly prefers burial and has offered to assume costs in those cases. Questions focused on how long officials must make a bona fide effort to notify a spouse or next of kin and whether the bill would affect current practices; Elkins said it would not change existing policy on that point and suggested a possible floor amendment for additional issues. Rabbi Litman testified in support, explaining the religious importance of burial and the community’s concern about cremation. The committee substitute was adopted, and the bill passed with a favorable expression, though Senator Herron and Senator Tichenor expressed reservations and voted no or passed, citing constituent concerns and the possibility that family members may later seek a burial place to visit.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's a three-bill agenda, and the first bill is S. 246, sponsored by Senator Fernandez.
• Our second bill is S. 4640A, sponsored by Senator Fernandez.
• Our second bill is S. 4640A, sponsored by Senator Fernandez.
• And our third and final bill is S. 9221, sponsored by Senator Ryan. Thank you.
• And our third and final bill is S. 9221, sponsored by Senator Ryan.

Keywords: 993, senate, all

Summary: The committee met for its final meeting of the year and opened with brief remarks thanking members for their participation and noting continued work on addiction services and substance use disorder issues, including efforts to reduce stigma and support funding in the budget. The agenda consisted of three bills related to harm reduction and drug checking. The committee first considered S. 246, which would establish a wound care kit and testing strip distribution program; it was moved, approved unanimously, and reported to Finance. Next, S. 4640A would authorize on-site overdose response services and require certain venues to maintain opioid antagonists; it was also approved unanimously and reported to the calendar. The third bill, S. 9221, would create a program to test for medetomidine, benzodiazepines, xylazine, and other harmful contaminants; members discussed the changing drug supply and the need for drug checking, then approved the bill unanimously. At the close, the chair thanked members for their work and adjourned the meeting, noting it was the last committee meeting of the year.

Transcript Highlights:

• Bill Number 1551, sponsored by Senator Parker: An act to amend the Public Service Law in relation to
• Next, Bill Number 2258, sponsored by Senator Comrie: An act to amend the Public Service Law in relation
• Next, Bill Number 2416, sponsored by Senator Parker: An act on the Public Service Law and General Business
• Excellent, sponsor. Yeah, excellent. Can I get a motion to move the bill?
• And last, Bill Number 9835, sponsored by Senator Doddlow: An act to amend the Public Service Law in relation

Keywords: 993, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Standing Committee on Energy and Telecommunications met with Senator Kevin Parker presiding and several colleagues present. The committee considered four bills: S.1551, which would prohibit the release of consumption data; S.2258, which would require emergency notices to customers in certain languages; S.2416, which would release victims of domestic violence from certain contracts; and S.9835, which would require gas and electric corporations to give 30 days’ notice before service rate or charge increases. The sponsor and committee briefly introduced each measure, and no substantive debate or testimony was recorded in the transcript. Each bill was moved and seconded. S.1551 and S.2258 each had one recorded no vote, but both still had enough support to advance. S.2416 and S.9835 were also approved without recorded opposition. All four bills were reported to third reading, and the committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're supportive amend, and we're working with the author's office and the sponsor, and we feel like
• We're supportive amend, and we're working with the author's office and the sponsor, and we feel like
• Ryan O'Jackie with the Regional Water Authority, co-sponsor, and obviously in support.
• Cam Besdeck with the Northern California Water Association, proud co-sponsor and in support.
• We've appreciated conversations over the past few months with the Assembly Member and with the sponsors

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Vice President and Legislative Chair of the Consumer Attorneys of California, testifying today as a sponsor
• With me today in support is the sponsor of the bill, the Secretary of State's office, Tim Cromarty, Deputy
• Our organization is a proud co-sponsor, a proud sponsor of AB 1801.
• With me is Sharon Gonsalves, who is testifying on behalf of the City of Carlsbad, one of the co-sponsors
• We're pleased to co-sponsor this measure with the San Diego County District Attorney and thank Assembly

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Members, are there any questions of the sponsor? Chair Mooney: Seeing no questions.
• Chair Mooney: Are there questions of the bill sponsor? Questions?
• Chair Mooney: Members, other questions or questions of the sponsor?
• Chair Mooney: Any more questions of the sponsor of the amendment?
• Chair Mooney: Any more questions of the sponsor or debate on the bill?

Transcript Highlights:

• That is to gather co-sponsors and give final approval for public release.
• So that will give us all two more weeks to find co-sponsors.
• That is to gather co-sponsors<00:15:00.959> and<00:15:01.199> give<00:15:01.519> final
• <00:15:01.920> approval<00:15:02.399> for co-sponsors and give final approval for co-sponsors
• to find co-sponsors. to find co-sponsors.

Keywords: 926, house, all

Summary: The House opened with a devotional by Representative Tony Miklas, who used the Aesop fable about “belling the cat” to emphasize practical wisdom and the need to consider how legislation will actually be implemented by agencies, towns, businesses, nonprofits, schools, and courts. The chamber then welcomed Representative Valerie Taylor of Mendon, who had been appointed to represent Rutland 11 and took the oath of office; she was escorted to her seat and appointed to the House Health Care Committee. Representative Feltus of Lyndon was also appointed to the Joint Fiscal Committee. Members suspended the rules to introduce 19 House bills by number only, with several referrals announced, including multiple bills sent to Judiciary, Health Care, Government Operations and Military Affairs, Human Services, Energy and Digital Infrastructure, and Environment. The House also referred a petition concerning school security to the Education Committee. In addition, the chamber adopted two joint Senate resolutions in concurrence: JRS 29, setting the weekend adjournment schedule for January 9, 2026, and JRS 31, setting the town meeting adjournment schedule for late February and early March 2026. The House also concurred in moving H.541, relating to interference with voters and election officials, from Government Operations and Military Affairs to Judiciary. The main action item was House Resolution 10, which amended House rules on bill draft request and approval deadlines in the second year of the biennium. The Rules Committee explained that the resolution would move the bill drafting request deadline to December 5, the draft-change deadline to January 15, and the bill approval deadline for introduction to January 31, citing the need for more time for legal review, better coordination between members and Legislative Council, and reduced staff burnout during the holiday and early-session period. The House adopted the resolution. The meeting ended with announcements about upcoming Appropriations budget workshops, a new Creative Sector Caucus, and a Climate Solutions Caucus meeting, followed by adjournment until January 8, 2026 at 3 p.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• We are proud co-sponsors of SB 81.
• Madi Lopez with the California Nurses Association, proud co-sponsor.
• Bruno Wiesard with the California Immigrant Policy Center, proud co-sponsor, in support. Thank you.
• I am also standing as a proud co-sponsor of this bill, as it also is a Latino caucus priority.
• PHI is proud to co-sponsor SB 717 because it provides a vital safeguard.

Summary: The Assembly Health Committee heard several Senate bills focused on health care access, privacy, and public health data. SB 81 (Arreguín) would require health care facilities to create nonpublic areas and bar immigration enforcement from entering without a judicial warrant or court order, while also protecting disclosure of immigration-related information in medical records. The bill drew strong support from labor, immigrant-rights, health care, and patient advocacy groups, with committee members emphasizing patient safety and privacy; one member raised implementation concerns about how the restrictions would work in practice. The committee voted the bill out on a due pass motion to the Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee, with one no vote recorded. SB 250 (Ochoa Bogh) would add skilled nursing facilities to DHCS’s managed care provider directory so Medi-Cal beneficiaries can more easily identify covered facilities. Supporters said the change would help seniors and people with disabilities avoid confusion and rushed placement decisions, especially during hospital discharge, and would make existing information easier to use. The committee passed the bill to Appropriations on a unanimous vote. SB 717 (Richardson) would formally recognize California’s three regional cancer registries in state law to help preserve federal funding and support cancer surveillance data collection. The author and supporters said the measure would protect more than $15 million in annual federal support and strengthen cancer research and tracking; the committee approved it unanimously to Appropriations. SB 504 (Laird) would allow health care providers to disclose personally identifying information about previously reported HIV infections to state or local health officials when needed for disease control or care coordination. The author described the bill as a modernization of reporting and coordination practices, and supporters from the California Medical Association and Planned Parenthood backed it. The committee sent the bill out as amended to the Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee on a unanimous vote. The meeting also included routine consent-calendar action and multiple add-on votes, with the committee repeatedly holding the roll open to record additional members’ votes.

Transcript Highlights:

• , away within weeks from his sponsor, away within weeks from his sponsor, becoming<04:42:40.000><
• poorly vetted or unvetted sponsors. poorly vetted or unvetted sponsors.
• Uh, these sponsors, I think it was said that the sponsors already receive background checks.
• to go to a sponsor. to go to a sponsor. that<05:25:25.920> instead<05:25:26.160> of
• were too busy pushing kids to sponsors were too busy pushing kids to sponsors at<05:26:58.160>

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Tuesday, December 16, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• President Smith is sponsored by the Senate.
• The doctor of the day is Daniel Montero, sponsored by Senator Bradley.
• Are there questions of the sponsor? Is there debate? Senator Rouson to close.
• Are there questions of the sponsor? Leader Berman, any questions? Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr.
• Questions of the sponsor on the bill as amended?

Keywords: 998, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So I appreciate that response, sponsor.
• So for that, I just want to thank the sponsor.
• So for that, I just want to thank the sponsor.
• Will the sponsor yield to a question? >> He will yield. >> Thank you, sponsor.
• >> Thank you, sponsor, for that >> Thank you, sponsor, for that explanation.<02:03:35.360

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The meeting opened with prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, then moved into committee and floor reports. Several measures received favorable committee reports and were ordered to first reading and placed on the calendar, including Current Resolution 9, Senate Joint Resolution 23, House Bill 145, House Bill 567, and House Bill 506 with House Committee Substitute 1. The chamber also noted that House Bills 500 and 504 had already received two readings and were sent to the Rules Committee before House Bill 500 was brought up for final consideration. Most of the discussion focused on House Bill 500, the executive branch budget bill. Members described it as a “good first draft” and emphasized a budget process they said was more transparent than in prior years. The bill was presented as a restrained two-year operating budget with spending growth kept at a little under 2% annually, while setting aside about 2% of projected revenues, or roughly $614 million, in the Budget Reserve Trust Fund for future needs. The budget also used base reductions in some areas while exempting others such as Medicaid benefits, SEEK, corrections, behavioral health, and veterans programs. Subcommittee chairs then outlined major spending areas. Education provisions included a 2% annual increase in base SEEK funding, transportation funding held flat, equalization for recallable nickel funding, continued retirement contributions, and major support for postsecondary access, dual credit, asset preservation, and workforce training. Health and family services provisions held Medicaid steady while adding waiver slots, behavioral health and substance use support, public health investments, and funding for rural health and laboratory capacity. Other sections covered personnel and pensions, veterans services, infrastructure, public safety, economic development, tourism, and environmental projects. The only recorded action on the floor was adoption of House Committee Substitute 1 to House Bill 500, followed by a motion for final passage of the bill as amended. The transcript ends as discussion on final passage begins, before any final vote is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• S110A, sponsored by Senator May.
• S5989A, sponsored by Senator Bynoe.
• Big fan of the sponsor. Right answer. Questions, concerns? Moved by Senator Murray.
• B.B. 680A, sponsored by Senator Connery, an act to amend the Education Law in relation to conducting
• S8044A, sponsored by Senator Bynoe, an act to amend the Education Law in relation to establishing the

Keywords: 993, senate, all

Summary: The Standing Committee on Libraries met on Tuesday, May 12 at 9:45 a.m. with Chair Celabino and Senators Brisport, Zellnor, Tedisco, and Murray present. The committee considered a short agenda of four Education Law bills related to libraries and library services. The first bill, S110A by Senator May, would require certain libraries to adopt policies ensuring staff can curate and develop collections, services, and programming consistent with the Human Rights Law and the Equal Rights Amendment. Members clarified that the measure was intended to empower local library boards and librarians to make collection decisions, rather than direct the Board of Regents to mandate specific content. The bill was moved by Senator Zellnor and seconded by Senator Murray, then advanced unanimously. The committee also advanced S5989A by Senator Bynoe on library cards for minors, B680A by Senator Connery directing a study on public libraries’ access to capital funding, and S8044A by Senator Bynoe establishing the Library Literacy Education Guidance Act. Each bill was moved, seconded, and approved without opposition. The meeting then adjourned after all four bills were reported out of committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• I am the prime sponsor of HB 1833.
• sponsor so he can look at that? sponsor so he can look at that?
• Uh the prime sponsor elements kick in.
• that he’d be open to that as well. extensive the prime sponsor wanted to extensive the prime sponsor
• Melissa's been trying to do sponsor.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Yeah, so that was actually after I had already sponsored the first proviso in 2023.
• about whether you could sponsor a proviso in relation to Civil Survival Project?
• In the list of duties, you don't talk about whether you'd sponsor any provisos.
• Does anybody in the private sector sponsor provisos? No.
• The sponsor provisos in the Washington State Legislature, correct? No, no. Okay.

Keywords: 904, all

Summary: The hearing resumed on day two of the Legislative Ethics Board fact-finding matter involving Representative Tara Simmons. After opening remarks and confirmation that board members had not engaged in outside research or ex parte communications, Simmons’s counsel moved to dismiss two allegations at the close of the board staff’s case: that Simmons pressured the Administrative Office of the Courts to alter a contract in favor of her employer, and that she improperly combined a legislative proviso for AEJG with a personal donation to the organization. Board staff opposed the motion, arguing the evidence showed Simmons’s legislative and private conduct were intertwined and that the board had enough evidence to require a defense. After deliberation, the board denied the motion to dismiss and proceeded to hear defense testimony. The first defense witness, Sharon Navas, testified that she met Simmons through advocacy work, later hired her at the Equity and Education Coalition (EEC), and maintained written employment policies intended to separate Simmons’s legislative role from her work for EEC. Navas said Simmons was never compensated for lobbying or legislative acts, that EEC paid her from unrestricted funds, and that Simmons did not work on the AEJG dashboard project or participate in the contract dispute with Anthony Powers and Chris Stanley. Navas described the proviso request and later contract issues as separate from Simmons’s legislative duties, and said she continued to pay invoices while the project was being completed. Simmons then testified about her background, legislative career, disability accommodations, and extensive efforts to seek ethics advice before taking outside employment or pursuing provisos. She said she repeatedly consulted House ethics counsel and reviewed prior board decisions to ensure her outside work and legislative actions were separated. Simmons described her relationship with Anthony Powers, the dashboard project, the proviso process, and her understanding that the work was distinct from her legislative role. The hearing paused for lunch after part of Simmons’s direct examination, with testimony set to continue after the break.

Transcript Highlights:

• Gibson, his staff, the Assembly committee, and the sponsors have done.
• Can I get my sponsor to also? Yeah. The opportunity to answer? If I may.
• Can I get my sponsor to also? Yeah. The opportunity to answer? If I may.
• Paige Clark, National Center for Youth Law, a proud co-sponsor.
• Paige Clark National Center for Youth Law, a proud co-sponsor.

Summary: The Assembly Education Committee heard a full agenda of bills, first adopting a consent calendar of 11 measures without individual presentations. The committee then took up AB 1412, which would require California schools to implement or adopt a transferred special education student’s IEP within 30 days for out-of-state transfers and to coordinate more quickly on records. The author and military-family witnesses said the bill would reduce delays for highly mobile students, especially military children; a school administrators group opposed it. The bill received initial support from committee members and was moved on call. The committee also reconsidered AB 281, which would require notice to parents when outside consultants provide sex education instruction; the author accepted amendments removing a copy-right provision, but the bill remained on call after a split vote. The committee heard AB 1005, which would create a statewide drowning-prevention education and swim-lesson voucher framework for underserved communities. The author and supporters described drowning as a preventable public health and equity issue, while the bill was clarified as developing a plan rather than immediately launching a voucher program. It was voted out on a 3-0 roll with the measure placed on call. AB 908, as amended, would add compliance monitoring for existing requirements that schools use LGBTQ-inclusive instructional materials and curriculum under the FAIR Act. Supporters said the bill would improve implementation and student safety; opponents raised concerns about privacy, girls’ sports, and school burdens. The committee approved the bill 5-2 and sent it to Appropriations. The committee then heard AB 1401, which would affirm parents’ access to school records, including unofficial records unless exempt by law. The author argued that parents need clearer access to information held by schools and vendors, while school officials and teachers’ union representatives warned the bill was too vague and could sweep in personal notes, journals, and other sensitive material. The bill failed on a 2-3 vote and was placed on call. Finally, AB 727 would require student ID cards to include the Trevor Project hotline for LGBTQ youth; supporters framed it as a suicide-prevention measure, while opponents argued it conflicted with parental rights and religious beliefs. Committee discussion focused on whether 988 already provides similar access and whether the Trevor Project is an appropriate resource to print on IDs; the hearing continued with the bill still under consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• And we do give this prime sponsor a...
• And we do give this prime sponsor a...
• Um, the sponsor of taking the question.
• He is the prime sponsor. >> Thank you, sir. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair.
• > in<05:45:01.840> this<05:45:02.000> and co-sponsor very interested in this and co-sponsor

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The House Committee on Health, Human Services, and Elderly Affairs heard HB 1790-FN, which would address involuntary admissions for certain individuals with a substance use disorder. Representative Lucy Weber introduced the bill for Representative Long, and the committee heard extensive testimony both in support of and in opposition to the proposal. Opponents, including John Burns of SOS Recovery and Jake Barry of New Futures, argued that involuntary commitment is not well supported by research, can retraumatize people, may increase overdose risk after release, and could undermine New Hampshire’s existing recovery and harm-reduction efforts. They emphasized that treatment should be voluntary, trauma-informed, and paired with housing, recovery supports, and other community-based services. Representative Long said he was willing to accept DHHS’s request to amend the bill into a study commission, though he expressed concern that a prior state study had not led to action. He said the commission should focus on implementation details, including where people would be placed, staffing, withdrawal management, elopement prevention, length of commitment, and aftercare. He described involuntary commitment as one tool for people with severe dangerous addictions, distinct from drug court, and said it could help avoid criminal records. Committee members asked about capacity at New Hampshire Hospital and how the proposal would work in practice. DHHS officials Katya Fox and Cynthia Pabonis testified that the bill raises major policy and fiscal concerns. They said New Hampshire’s current system has benefited from investments in naloxone, medication-assisted treatment, recovery centers, and community-based services, and that those investments have helped reduce overdose deaths. They estimated the bill would require a new 70-bed facility costing about $40 million to build and about $33.3 million annually to operate, with only a small portion offset by insurance, plus more than $600,000 in annual legal costs and additional staffing and system changes. They also said New Hampshire Hospital has 185 beds, with about 100 patients typically ready for less restrictive settings, and that housing shortages are a major bottleneck. NAMI New Hampshire also testified in opposition, saying families often want any possible treatment for loved ones but still opposed the bill. No vote or final action was taken in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• the example that I sent to the sponsors? the example that I sent to the sponsors?
• I do ask um bill sponsor.
• want to get in the way of the sponsor want to get in the way of the sponsor saying<03:04:37.280>
• sponsor for the amendment. sponsor for the amendment. Rep<03:08:41.880> Froelich.
• We just heard two bill sponsors crisis.

Keywords: 981, all

Transcript Highlights:

• sponsor of this bill, Mr. Beg. sponsor of this bill, Mr. Beg.
• sponsor of this bill, Mr. Begage. sponsor of this bill, Mr. Begage.
• South Central proud to sponsor it.
• sponsor of this bill, Mr. Beg. sponsor of this bill, Mr. Beg.
• sponsor of this bill, Mr. Hill. sponsor of this bill, Mr. Hill.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Monday, December 15, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Beth Malnowski, the SEIU California, proud co-sponsor. Mariko Yoshihara, on behalf of U.S.
• Food and Western City Council, proud co-sponsor. Thank you.
• You're proud co-sponsors. Good afternoon, Chair and members, Beth Malnowski, the S.O.
• California, you're proud co-sponsors. And taking advantage for your ayevotes today.
• Mariko Yoshihar on behalf of U.S.F.W on Western City Council, proud co-sponsor. Thank you.

Summary: The Assembly Labor and Employment Committee heard several bills focused on labor standards, worker safety, and public transparency. SB 954 by Senator Blakespear would revise last year’s CEQA exemption for advanced manufacturing by adding worker protections such as prevailing wage, a skilled and trained workforce, high-road employment standards, and environmental guardrails. Supporters from labor, environmental justice, and conservation groups said the bill restores promised safeguards after SB 131, while business groups argued the added requirements would undermine the exemption and discourage investment. The committee voted 5-0 to do pass and re-refer SB 954 to Appropriations, leaving the roll open for absent members. The committee then considered SB 966 by Senator Gonzalez, which would codify refinery worker participation and safety protections adopted in 2017 after the 2012 Chevron Richmond fire. Supporters, including United Steelworkers and a former refinery worker, said the bill would preserve workers’ ability to report hazards, select representatives, and stop unsafe work, preventing future disasters. The Western States Petroleum Association opposed the bill, arguing it could be preempted by federal labor law and would add regulatory uncertainty. The committee passed SB 966 3-0 and re-referred it to Appropriations, with the roll left open. Next, SB 1203 by Senator Smallwood-Cuevas sought to modernize private security guard training, expand de-escalation instruction, strengthen accountability, and create a clearer professional pathway for the industry. The author and many security workers testified that guards are often first responders in volatile situations and need more practical training and better standards; opponents from industry and business groups warned the bill would raise costs, worsen staffing shortages, and create implementation problems, especially around third-party training and a new wage order. The committee voted 4-1 to do pass and re-refer SB 1203 to Public Safety, with one no vote and the roll left open. The committee also heard SB 1284 by Senator Smallwood-Cuevas, a transparency bill requiring DHCS to publish the names of large employers with workers enrolled in Medi-Cal and the estimated taxpayer cost. Supporters said the measure would show how low wages and unaffordable coverage shift health costs to the public, while opponents argued Medi-Cal enrollment depends on many factors and that naming employers would be misleading and amount to public shaming. After discussion, the committee voted 4-2 to do pass and re-refer SB 1284 to Appropriations, leaving the roll open. The transcript then began discussion of SB 1054 by Senator Cabaldon, which would improve workforce data collection and sharing to better evaluate job-training pathways, but the excerpt cuts off before testimony or action on that bill.